Greater Jamaica Local Development Company
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 112563026
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Jamaica, NY, USA
- Phone
- 7182910282
- Rating
- 67
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Urban, Community Economic Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,036,627
- Expenses
- $358,801
- Assets
- $6,985,887
- Liabilities
- $1,944,318
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
36 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JUSTIN K RODGERS (PRESIDENT & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- JUSTIN K RODGERS (PRESIDENT & CEO): $358,397 total reported compensation
- PATRICIA ROBINSON (CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER/VP): $229,724 total reported compensation
- TODD S BENENSON (ASSISTANT TREASURER/CFO): $218,149 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
See schedule ogreater jamaica local development company, inc. ("gjldc") working in conjunction with its affiliate company, the greater jamaica development corporation ("gjdc"), provides financial and related technical assistance to qualifying small businesses and/or entrepreneurs in gjldc's target market. The objective of the financing is to promote entrepreneurship, create new jobs, retain existing jobs, and promote community revitalization and/or stabilization.this support includes, but is not limited to, - navigating governmental regulations- accessing training grants- loan packaging- advocacy
What it reported doing in 2025
See schedule owithin our target market, gjldc provides essential access to capital for qualified commercial borrowers who are unable to secure financing through traditional lending institutions. By addressing this financing gap, we help unlock business potential and drive economic development in underserved communities. Gjldc frequently partners with banks, credit unions, and other financial entities to co-finance projects that exceed our individual lending capacity, allowing us to support larger-scale ventures that generate meaningful economic outcomes.our approach to impact is both quantitative and community-focused. We measure success not just by dollars disbursed, but also by the volume of private capital leveraged, the strength and sustainability of the businesses we support, and, most critically, the number of local jobs created or retained. These metrics reflect our commitment to fostering inclusive economic growth and empowering entrepreneurs from all backgrounds to build and scale their enterprises.the covid-19 pandemic presented an unprecedented challenge to the small business community. In response, gjldc and our affiliate gjdc significantly expanded our technical assistance offerings, the urgency of the pandemic prompted us to more than double our outreach. Working closely with federal, state, and local government partners, we served as a trusted resource during a period of crisis, ensuring our business community had access to accurate guidance and critical capital.as we continue to emerge from the effects of the pandemic, gjldc remains focused on growth and opportunity. In 2025, we made 18 new loans, including both term loans and lines of credit, with an average loan amount of $19,400. These loans supported a diverse range of industries and helped businesses expand, stabilize operations, and hire new staff.since the inception of our loan fund, gjldc has loaned or leveraged more than $52.1 million, directly contributing to the creation or retention of over 2,100 jobs. These results underscore the importance of our work in building resilient local economies and supporting small businesses as engines of job creation and neighborhood revitalization.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 87% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 51
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 75
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 33.8%; rating input score 34
- Program expense ratio: 96.6%; rating input score 97
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 65.4%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 19.47; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.28; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 47.5%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 21.3% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 20.2% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 15.9% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 33.8% of revenue deployed · 96.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 30 of 30 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $347K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $358K · 36 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 6 filed related-organization links
- Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
- People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 34/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.